Comparative Diagnostic Performance of Artificial Intelligence Versus Conventional Approaches for Early Detection of Mosquito-Borne Viral Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, with Evidence Predominantly from Dengue Studies

Background: Early differentiation of mosquito-borne viral infections from other causes of acute febrile illness remains challenging, particularly in endemic and resource-limited settings. Artificial intelligence (AI) models have been proposed to improve early diagnosis, but their incremental value over conventional approaches is unclear. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies evaluating AI/machine learning models versus conventional approaches (clinical assessment, laboratory-based pathways, or traditional statistical models) for early detection of mosquito-borne viral infections. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched through August 2025. Paired performance metrics were synthesized using fixed- and random-effects models. Outcomes included AUC, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST. Results: Thirteen studies met inclusion criteria. Under random-effects models, AI improved sensitivity (ES = 2.64, p = 0.028), specificity (ES = 5.55, p < 0.001), accuracy (ES = 3.19, p < 0.001), and NPV (ES = 13.84, p < 0.001). No consistent advantage was observed for AUC, and PPV findings were inconsistent. Substantial heterogeneity was present across outcomes (I2 = 100%). Most studies relied on internal validation, and PROBAST identified high risk of bias in the analysis domain in over half. Conclusions: AI-based models may enhance threshold-dependent performance metrics, supporting their use as adjunctive decision-support tools for early triage and case exclusion, while external validation and implementation-focused research remain essential.